Marco Rubio on Budget & Economy

Tax, borrow, & spend is not the way out of the recession

Pres. Obama's solution to virtually every problem we face is for Washington to tax more, borrow more and spend more.

This idea--that our problems were caused by a government that was too small--it's just not true. In fact, a major cause of our recent
downturn was a housing crisis created by reckless government policies.

And the idea that more taxes and more government spending is the best way to help hardworking middle class taxpayers--that's an old idea that's failed every time it's been tried.

Oppose Obama stimulus package; it's bad for America

Q: From the Obama stimulus package, by the start of 2010, Florida had received $8.2 billion in stimulus funds. Gov. Crist says that has created or saved 87,000 jobs. Mr. Rubio, why is $8 billion & 87,000 jobs bad for a state that has 12% unemployment?

RUBIO: Well, if it's bad for America, it can't possibly be good for your state. Since February, 211,000 Floridians have lost their jobs. Do you want a candidate that would have voted against the stimulus and supported something that would have cost less
money and created more jobs. If that's the candidate you want, that would be me. Or do you want the someone who would have voted with the Democrats for the stimulus package? And that candidate would be Gov. Crist.

CRIST: If we had taken the speaker's
approach, we would have had 87,000 more people on top of that 12% that would be unemployed in Florida today.

Q: If you had been a senator in 2009 you would have voted for the stimulus?

Support balanced budget amendment and line-item veto

I am gravely concerned by a federal government that continues spending money it doesn't have. In early 2009, I joined Florida's entire Republican congressional delegation in opposing the $787 billion stimulus bill. In the US Senate, I will support
measures like a balanced budget amendment and the line-item veto that will help control the excessive and wasteful spending in Washington that threatens to leave future generations with crushing debt and a country worse off than that of their parents.

Supports the Cut-Cap-and-Balance Pledge.

[The Cut-Cap-and-Balance Pledge is sponsored by a coalition of several hundred Tea Party, limited-government, and conservative organizations].

Despite our nation's staggering $14.4 trillion debt, there are many Members of the U.S. House and Senate who want to raise our nation's debt limit without making permanent reforms in our fiscal policies. We believe that this is a fiscally irresponsible position that would place America on the Road to Ruin. At the same time, we believe that the current debate over raising the debt limit provides a historic opportunity to focus public attention, and then public policy, on a path to a balanced budget and paying down our debt.

We believe that the "Cut, Cap, Balance" plan for substantial spending cuts in FY 2012, a statutory spending cap, and Congressional passage of a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution is the minimum necessary precondition to raising the debt limit.
The ultimate goal is to get us back to a point where increases in the debt limit are no longer necessary. If you agree, take the Cut, Cap, Balance Pledge!

I pledge to urge my Senators and Member of the House of Representatives to oppose any debt limit increase unless all three of the following conditions have been met:

Cut: Substantial cuts in spending that will reduce the deficit next year and thereafter.

Cap: Enforceable spending caps that will put federal spending on a path to a balanced budget.

Balance: Congressional passage of a Balanced Budget Amendment to the U.S. Constitution -- but only if it includes both a spending limitation and a super-majority for raising taxes, in addition to balancing revenues and expenses.

Disapprove of increasing the debt limit.

Rubio co-sponsored Joint Resolution on Debt Limit

Congressional Summary:JOINT RESOLUTION: Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives: That Congress disapproves of the President's exercise of authority to increase the debt limit, as submitted on Jan. 12, 2012.

OnTheIssues Explanation: On Jan. 12, 2012, Pres. Obama notified Congress of his intent to raise the nation's debt ceiling by $1.2 trillion, two weeks after he had postponed the request to give lawmakers more time to consider the action. Congress then had 15 days to say no before the debt ceiling is automatically raised from $15.2 trillion to $16.4 trillion. Hence the debt ceiling was increased.

In Aug. 2011, the US government was nearly shut down by an impasse over raising the debt ceiling; under an agreement reached then, the President could raise the debt limit in three increments while also implementing $2.4 trillion in budget cuts. The agreement also gave Congress the option of voting to block each of the debt-ceiling increases by passing a "resolution of disapproval." The House disapproved; the Senate, by declining to vote in the 15-day window, killed the Resolution. Even if the resolution were passed, Pres. Obama could veto it; which could be overridden by a 2/3 majority in the House and Senate. The House vote only had 57% approval, not enough for the 67% override requirement, so the Senate vote became moot. The same set of actions occurred in Sept. 2011 for the first debt ceiling increase.